The Inventive Edge - October 2024

THOUGHT LEADERSHIP

The Future of Automotive Industry is EASCY

[Contributors: Rakesh Sharma]

The automotive industry is undergoing a significant transformation driven by technological advancements, changing consumer preferences, and evolving regulatory landscapes. This evolution encompasses the transition from traditional internal combustion engine vehicles to electric and autonomous vehicles, the integration of software and connectivity in vehicles, and a focus on sustainability. The patent landscape plays a crucial role in this evolution, influencing competition among major players and presenting both challenges and opportunities.

Evolution of the Automotive Industry

The automotive industry has evolved dramatically since the introduction of the first mass-produced cars in the early 20th century. Initially dominated by mechanical engineering, the focus has shifted towards integrating advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI), the Internet of Things (IoT), and automation in manufacturing processes.

Current Trends

1. Electrification: The shift towards electric vehicles (EVs) is one of the most significant trends. Governments worldwide are implementing stricter emissions regulations, prompting automakers to invest heavily in EV technology. In 2024, global EV sales saw a 20% increase compared to the previous year, indicating a robust demand for sustainable transportation solutions.
2. Autonomous Vehicles: The development of self-driving technology promises to revolutionize transportation by enhancing safety and efficiency. Companies are investing in AI-driven systems that enable vehicles to navigate autonomously while communicating with other vehicles and infrastructure.
3. Connected Cars: The integration of connectivity features allows vehicles to interact with digital ecosystems, providing real-time data and enhancing user experience through services like navigation, diagnostics, and entertainment.
4. Advanced Manufacturing: Innovations such as 3D printing and robotics are streamlining production processes, enabling greater customization and efficiency in vehicle manufacturing.

Patent Landscape

Major Players

The competitive landscape is characterized by traditional automakers like Ford, General Motors, Toyota, and emerging players such as Tesla and Rivian. Tech giants like Google and Apple are also entering the automotive space, focusing on software solutions that enhance vehicle functionality.

Patent Trends

The patent landscape reflects these shifts, with an increasing number of patents filed for technologies related to EVs, autonomous driving systems, and connected vehicle technologies. This surge indicates a race among companies to secure intellectual property rights over innovative technologies that will define the future of mobility.

Challenges

1. Intellectual Property Competition: As companies rush to innovate, they face challenges related to patent infringement disputes. The complexity of new technologies often leads to overlapping patents, creating legal challenges that can hinder innovation.
2. Regulatory Compliance: Adhering to varying regulations across different markets complicates patent strategies. Companies must navigate a mosaic of legal requirements while protecting their innovations globally.
3. Sustainability Pressures: The automotive industry is under pressure to develop sustainable practices throughout its supply chain. This includes not only vehicle production but also addressing issues related to battery recycling and resource management.

Future Outlook - Strategic Adaptations

To thrive in this evolving landscape, automotive companies must adopt flexible business models that prioritize customer experience and sustainability. They should focus on:

• Digital Transformation: Embracing software-centric approaches will be essential for creating value beyond traditional manufacturing.
• Collaborative Innovation: Partnerships with tech firms can accelerate the development of advanced technologies while sharing risks associated with R&D.
• Consumer-Centric Strategies: Understanding shifting consumer preferences towards eco-friendly and technologically advanced vehicles will guide product development.

Conclusion

The automotive industry's future is poised for significant change as it navigates technological advancements, competitive pressures from both traditional players and new entrants, and evolving regulatory landscapes. The patent landscape will continue to shape competition while presenting challenges that require strategic foresight and agility from industry leaders.

Navigating the Complexities of Patent Law for 112 Issues: Insights from Landmark USPTO Case Studies

[Contributors: Rakesh Sharma and Baddam Nithya Reddy]

In the rapidly evolving world of innovation, securing robust patent protection is crucial for businesses and inventors. Also, patent law is a cornerstone of innovation, offering protection to inventors while ensuring that the public benefits from new discoveries. However, the legal landscape surrounding patents is intricate, with recent case studies highlighting the challenges and evolving standards in patentability, particularly in the United States. Here, we delve into three significant cases—Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi, Dyfan, LLC v. Target Corporation, and Juno Therapeutics, Inc. v. Kite Pharma, Inc.—each of which sheds light on crucial aspects of patent law, including enablement, definiteness, and the written description requirement under §112 of the Patent Act.

Case 1: Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi—The Enablement Conundrum

The case of Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi has had a significant impact on how patent drafters approach the enablement requirement under 35 U.S.C. § 112(a). Amgen, a leader in biopharmaceuticals, sued Sanofi for infringing its patents on LDL cholesterol-lowering antibodies targeting PCSK9. The central issue was whether Amgen’s patents provided sufficient details to enable the full scope of the claimed invention.

Supreme Court Judgment:

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Amgen’s patents were invalid due to lack of enablement, as they claimed an overly broad class of antibodies without sufficient details for experts to reproduce them. The Court reaffirmed that broader claims require more extensive enablement, highlighting the importance of detailed specifications in patent applications.

Guidelines for Assessing Enablement Post-Amgen:

Following this decision, the USPTO issued guidelines to ensure consistent application of the enablement requirement. These guidelines emphasize the need for detailed specifications, especially for broad claims. The In re Wands factors remain central to assessing whether the required level of experimentation is reasonable.

Case 2: Dyfan, LLC v. Target Corporation—The Definiteness Dilemma

The case of Dyfan, LLC v. Target Corporation underscores the importance of definiteness in patent claims, particularly concerning “means-plus-function” claims under 35 U.S.C. § 112(f). Dyfan accused Target of infringing its patents related to location-based messaging, but Target argued that the claims were indefinite because they lacked the necessary corresponding structure.

Final Decision:

While the District Court initially sided with Target, declaring the patents indefinite, the Federal Circuit reversed this decision. The appellate court found that the District Court had ignored critical evidence—specifically, testimony from Target’s own expert, which indicated that a person of ordinary skill in the art would understand the claimed limitations to imply a structure based on the patent specifications.

Case 3: Juno Therapeutics, Inc. v. Kite Pharma, Inc.—The Written Description Requirement

In Juno Therapeutics, Inc. v. Kite Pharma, Inc., the focus was on the written description requirement under 35 U.S.C. § 112. Juno alleged that Kite’s therapeutic composition infringed its patent, which claimed a nucleic acid polymer encoding a chimeric T cell receptor with a binding element known as a single-chain variable fragment (scFv). The claims described the binding element based on its function rather than its specific structure.

Final Decision:

Initially, the U.S. District Court ruled in favor of Juno, resulting in a $1.2 billion judgment against Kite. However, on appeal, the Federal Circuit reversed this decision, finding that the patent’s description did not sufficiently demonstrate that the inventors possessed the full scope of the claimed invention at the time of filing. As a result, the claims were invalidated.

Pro Tip for Patent Drafters and Engineers

When drafting patent applications, always ensure that your claims are sufficiently detailed and supported by a robust specification. Broad claims can be advantageous, but they must be backed by a thorough enablement, clear structure, and a comprehensive written description to withstand legal scrutiny. The key is to anticipate potential challenges and address them proactively in the drafting stage.

Conclusion

These cases highlight the importance of meticulous patent drafting and prosecution in today’s complex legal landscape. By following the outlined do's and don'ts, patent drafters and engineers can enhance the robustness of their patents, making them more defensible against challenges and better aligned with the evolving standards of patent law. Staying informed about key rulings and adapting strategies accordingly will be crucial for securing and maintaining strong intellectual property protection.

INDIA IP NEWS & DEVELOPMENTS

• The Indian Patent Office has rejected the grant of a patent for dolutegravir, a crucial HIV drug marked by Viiv Healthcare, facilitating the entry of generics and expanding access to affordable, life-saving treatment. The decision, announced after a contentious nearly decade-long battle. READ MORE
• Basheer Khan, 62, and his son B. Mohamed Imran, 28, of Tiruchi recently received a patent for a device that they designed to remove oil spill from seawater through filtration along coastal areas. READ MORE
• Mangalore University (MU) has achieved an impressive milestone by securing eight patents over the past three years. READ MORE
• The patent is dubbed “Autonomous form factor control of a foldable mobile device”. This means that this device can automatically adjust its hinge by tracking the user’s movements and shifts, allowing for a better viewing angle no matter the position of the user. READ MORE

WORLD IP NEWS & DEVELOPMENTS

• British drugmaker GlaxoSmithKlin? sued Moderna?in U.S. federal court in Delaware on Tuesday, accusing it of violating GSK patent rights in messenger RNA technology with its blockbuster COVID-19 vaccine Spikevax and RSV shot mResvia. READ MORE
• Data storage provider Western Digital must pay $315.7 million in damages for violating a patent owner’s rights in data security technology, a jury of California federal court said on Friday October 18. READ MORE
• Deere & Co subsidiary Wirtgen America has resolved a patent lawsuit against Caterpillar after winning a $12.9 million verdict against the rival heavy-equipment company in a dispute over road-building technology, the companies told a Delaware federal court. READ MORE
• TWhen attached, this phone kind of looks like a flip phone, at least from the back, based on the sketches provided by a patent listing. It is, however, detachable. The top and bottom parts can be separated one from the other, so you can end up with two small-screened phones. READ MORE

PATENTLY ABSURD

• For that One Guy who is always drink ready (US9405132B2): Imagine: one night you go out with your friends, when suddenly someone randomly suggests staying in for drinks and everyone agrees. You all huddle around a fridge filled with bottled drinks, only to realize: nobody has a bottle opener! And then, out of nowhere, you take off your sunglasses (well of course you were wearing one at night!). Pushing everyone aside, you use them to pop open bottle after bottle while everyone else is just caught off guard. Who knew that the key to a fun night stay was right on your face? (PS: There is also a product for this patent! Refer: How to use your bottle opener sunglasses - The Hook – William Painter)

• Pierced Glasses (US7066592): Losing eyeglasses is frustrating, but that problem ends when the lenses are pierced into the bridge of your nose. It might be painful, but you’ll always know where your glasses are.

BRIEF OVERVIEW ON EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES

Revolutionary ChatGPT-Like AI for Cancer Diagnosis

Present AI systems tend to work only for limited cancer types and are trained to perform specific tasks such as detecting cancer presence or predicting a tumor’s genetic profile. However, the new model was tested on 19 types of cancer, giving it an exposure like that of large language models such as ChatGPT.

The AI model detects cancer cells and predicts a tumor’s molecular profile based on cellular features seen on the digital slides of tumor tissues with superior accuracy to most current AI systems. It can forecast patient survival across multiple cancer types and accurately pinpoint features in the tissue that surrounds a tumor — also known as the tumor microenvironment — that are related to a patient’s response to standard treatments, including surgery, chemotherapy, radiation, and immunotherapy. It identified specific tumor characteristics previously not known to be linked to patient survival.

Training and performance

The new model, called CHIEF (Clinical Histopathology Imaging Evaluation Foundation), was trained on 15 million unlabeled images chunked into sections of interest. The tool was then trained further on 60,000 whole-slide images of tissues including lung, breast, prostate, colorectal, stomach, esophageal, kidney, brain, liver, thyroid, pancreatic, cervical, uterine, ovarian, testicular, skin, soft tissue, adrenal gland, and bladder. Training the model to look both at specific sections of an image and the whole image allowed it to relate specific changes in one region to the overall context. This approach, the researchers said, enabled CHIEF to interpret an image more holistically by considering a broader context, instead of just focusing on a particular region.

Prediction tumors’ molecular profiles

CHIEF outperformed current AI methods for predicting genomic variations in a tumor by looking at the microscopic slides. This new AI approach successfully identified features associated with several important genes related to cancer growth and suppression, and it predicted key genetic mutations related to how well a tumor might respond to various standard therapies. CHIEF also detected specific DNA patterns related to how well a colon tumor might respond to a form of immunotherapy called immune checkpoint blockade.?

Insights about tumor behavior

CHIEF generates heat maps on an image. On analysis human pathologists saw the intriguing signals reflecting interactions between cancer cells and surrounding tissues. Longer-term survivors have a greater number of immune cells in areas of the tumor, compared with shorter-term survivors. It makes sense because a greater presence of immune cells may indicate the immune system has been activated to attack the tumor.

Source: 96% Accuracy: Harvard Scientists Unveil Revolutionary ChatGPT-Like AI for Cancer Diagnosis (scitechdaily.com)

USPTO updates on navigating patent eligibility for Artificial Intelligence (AI) Invention

Aiming to assist the evaluation of patent eligibility of Artificial Intelligence (AI) inventions, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), on July 16 2024, issued a guidance update for the matter. The guidance also provides new examples to clarify how the subject matter eligibility is analysed for AI inventions using the Alice/Mayo framework (a framework based on Alice and Mayo case laws that is currently employed for determining subject matter eligibility of computer-related inventions).

Under this framework, it is first determined whether the claims fall under an ineligible subject matter, such as laws of nature, natural phenomena, or abstract ideas. If yes, it is determined whether the claim elements individually and as an ordered combination make up an eligible subject matter. The guidance update is divided into five sections summarized below, each addressing a different aspects of patent eligibility and the USPTO’s AI and emerging technology efforts.

Section 1: Summary of USPTO’s AI/ET and subject matter eligibility efforts

This section provides an overview of the USPTO's AI and emerging technologies efforts which began in 2019.

Section 2: Subject matter eligibility

This section summarizes the existing analysis for determining patent eligibility for all inventions under the Alice/Mayo framework, as detailed in the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure. This analysis first determines whether the invention falls into one of the four statutory categories (processes, machines, manufactures, and compositions of factor) and then assesses whether it is patent eligible under the Alice/Mayo framework.

Section 3: Update of the USPTO patent eligibility guidance to AI inventions

In this section, the USPTO details eligibility updates to the MPEP, which now includes guidance as it pertains to AI.

• Step 2A, prong I: This step examines whether a claim is directed to an abstract idea. Many AI inventions fall into this category because they often involve mathematical concepts, methods of organizing human activity, or mental processes.
• Step 2A, prong II: This step examines whether the AI claims are tied to a practical application. The step is particularly relevant as AI inventions can be framed as improvements to computer functionality or other technical fields.

Section 4: Applicability of the USPTO eligibility guidance to AI-assisted inventions

This section states that the subject matter eligibility of AI-assisted inventions is a separate issue from an AI inventorship.

Section 5: USPTO’s hypothetical examples:

In this section, the guidance introduces some hypothetical examples as:

Example: Anomaly Detection using Artificial Neural Networks- This example presents AI claims directed to using a neural network for anomaly detection, with analysis explaining when such claims are abstract or patent eligible.

Example: AI-based Speech Signal Analysis- This example involves AI claims related to analysing speech signals to separate desired speech from background noise. This analysis shows when claims are considered abstract or when they qualify as improvements to technology.

Source: Navigating patent eligibility for AI inventions after the USPTO's AI guidance update | Reuters

TECH BITS

• Researchers from Shivaji University, Kolhapur’s Chemistry department have received a UK patent for their work on the ‘Production of Potable Water From Pollutant Dyes in the Textile Industry’. Read more
• Three researchers at the Department of Biotechnology, Cochin University of Science and Technology (Cusat), have secured a patent for the development of an adjuvant formulation based on aluminium-incorporated polymer nanoparticles. Read more